SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

Search for www.chanrobles.com

PLEASE CLICK HERE FOR THE LATEST ➔ SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

EN BANC

G.R. No. L-20304            October 30, 1964

PERFECTO FAYPON, Petitioner, vs. SALVADOR L. MARIÑO, FELICISIMO R. ROSETE and ALEJANDRO E. SEBASTIAN, Respondents.

Crispin D. Baizas & Associates for petitioner.
Office of the Solicitor General for respondents.

R E S O L U T I O Nchanrobles virtual law library

REYES, J.B.L., J.:

Petitioner, Perfecto Faypon, filed this petition for the annulment of the order of the Executive Secretary, dated September 6, 1962, suspending the petitioner from the Office of Director of the Philippine Virginia Tobacco Administration; to compel said Executive Secretary to allow petitioner to exercise the rights and functions and restore him to the full use and enjoyment of such office; and enjoin the Executive Secretary from proceeding with the administrative investigation of charges filed against him.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

Upon application by the petitioner, this Court, on December 21, 1962, adopted the following resolution:

Passing upon the petition for mandatory injunction filed by petitioner on December 7, 1962, in case G. R. No. L-20304 (Perfecto Faypon vs. Salvador L. Mariño, et al.), and the opposition of the Solicitor General; considering that the period of suspension has become unreasonable because: (a) The petitioner was suspended on September 6, 1962 up to the present time, for a period of three and a half months; (b) the administrative investigation does not appear to have been continued during the said period, notwithstanding that the Supreme Court has not issued any writ of preliminary injunction; and (c) the petitioner's term of office expires on January 3, 1963, THE COURT RESOLVES to grant the injunction prayed for and order the reinstatement of petitioner (Garcia vs. Executive Sec'y, L-19478, promulgated September 13, 1962) upon his filing of a bond of P200.;

and the bond having been posted on the same day, the preliminary injunction was duly issued.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

The administrative investigation against petitioner was terminated on May 10, 1963.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

It being admitted that the petitioner's term of office expired On January 3, 1963, without his being reappointed, the present has now become moot and academic.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

WHEREFORE, the above-entitled case is dismissed, for being moot without costs.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

Bengzon, C.J., Bautista Angelo, Concepcion, Paredes, Dizon, Regala, Makalintal, Bengzon, J.P., and Zaldivar, concur.